Q: We’ve been told that my mother-in-law has a simple will
that splits everything between her three children – my husband and his two
siblings. What will happen to my husband’s inheritance if he predeceases his
mother? As his surviving spouse, would I
be entitled to his share of her estate? If her will doesn't make this clear,
can it be challenged, since my husband and I are the only ones who are there
for her? Also, when adding up the final value of her estate, does it include
everything she owned, including jewelry, furs, furniture, and bank accounts? My
husband says his sister will get all the jewelry and furs, and he and his
brother will split the proceeds from the sale of the house. Do we have a right
to see a copy of the will? -- MA, via email
A: Nobody has a
right to see your mother-in-law's will -- let alone to challenge it -- until after
her death. And as her daughter-in-law, you are entitled only to what she
chooses to leave you. If your husband predeceases her, you won't inherit his
share of his mother’s estate unless her will says so.
Clearly, you feel morally entitled to a generous legacy.
But in-laws have no legal entitlement to inherit.
Among other things, this means you cannot challenge the will. You can only challenge a will if 1) you would
be legally entitled to inherit if there were no will; or 2) you were named in the decedent's
previous will, but disinherited in this one.
Besides, even a person who meets the legal requirements to challenge a will cannot get it overturned merely on the grounds that it's unfair.
Legally speaking, unfairness
doesn’t matter.
To overturn a will, you have to convince a court that at least one of the following occurred:
The will was
improperly executed. (It wasn't signed by witnesses, for example.) The testator lacked the mental competence to know what
she was doing. (She disinherited her child because she didn't remember that she had a child.) She signed it as a result of fraud. (She didn't know it was her will, she thought she was signing an insurance policy.) She signed it under undue influence or under duress. (She disinherited her child after being persistently lied to about his character, for example, or after being told her caregiver would abandon her unless she did so.)
Believe me, none of these things is easy
to prove.
Yes, a person's estate consists of everything he or she owned --
literally everything, including the loose change on the bedside table.
So much for the law.
Now let's talk about the emotional subtext of your letter.
It sounds as if you
feel that your mother-in-law takes your role as her caregiver for granted.
Her plan to leave her furs and jewelry to her daughter is
natural enough; but under the circumstances you've described, it's also natural
that you feel slighted. You understandably want her to acknowledge your
importance in her life.
You and your husband should find a tactful way to make this
clear to her.
For example, he might tell her how much you would one day
value a personal bequest, like a favorite piece of jewelry, in acknowledgment
of your special relationship with her.
But be warned: There is no surer way to destroy your
prospects of such a bequest than to imply that you deserve a bigger share of
her assets than her own children when she dies.
Comments